The mediating role of reflective functioning and general psychopathology in the relationship between childhood conduct disorder and adult aggression among offenders.

BACKGROUND: The nature of the pathway from conduct disorder (CD) in adolescence to antisocial behavior in adulthood has been debated and the role of certain mediators remains unclear. One perspective is that CD forms part of a general psychopathology dimension, playing a central role in the developmental trajectory. Impairment in reflective functioning (RF), i.e., the capacity to understand one's own and others' mental states, may relate to CD, psychopathology, and aggression. Here, we characterized the structure of psychopathology in adult male-offenders and its role, along with RF, in mediating the relationship between CD in their adolescence and current aggression. METHODS: A secondary analysis of pre-treatment data from 313 probation-supervised offenders was conducted, and measures of CD symptoms, general and specific psychopathology factors, RF, and aggression were evaluated through clinical interviews and questionnaires. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that a bifactor model best fitted the sample's psychopathology structure, including a general psychopathology factor (p factor) and five specific factors: internalizing, disinhibition, detachment, antagonism, and psychoticism. The structure of RF was fitted to the data using a one-factor model. According to our mediation model, CD significantly predicted the p factor, which was positively linked to RF impairments, resulting in increased aggression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the critical role of a transdiagnostic approach provided by RF and general psychopathology in explaining the link between CD and aggression. Furthermore, they underscore the potential utility of treatments focusing on RF, such as mentalization-based treatment, in mitigating aggression in offenders with diverse psychopathologies.

Implementing and evaluating group interpersonal therapy for postnatal depression in Lebanon and Kenya-individually randomised superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Depression ranks as the foremost mental health concern among childbearing women. Within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), between 20 and 25% of women encounter depression during pregnancy or soon after delivery. This condition impacts not only the mothers but also their offspring. Offspring of women suffering from postnatal depression (PND) exhibit suboptimal cognitive development and increased emotional and behavioural issues throughout their growth. This scenario becomes more pronounced in LMICs, where numerous adversities further jeopardise children's developmental progress. Despite antenatal services providing a pivotal platform to address women's mental health needs, PND treatment remains inaccessible in many LMICs. The World Health Organization advocates interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) for treating depression. While research from high-income countries has established the efficacy of IPT and group-IPT (g-IPT) for PND, its effectiveness within the LMIC context and its potential benefits for child development remain uncharted. This study seeks to gauge the potency of g-IPT for women with PND in two LMICs. METHODS: This multi-site randomised controlled trial is a continuation of two preceding phases-conceptual mapping and a feasibility study executed in Lebanon and Kenya. Insights gleaned from these phases underpin this comprehensive RCT, which contrasts the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of high-quality standard care (HQ-SC) augmented with g-IPT against HQ-SC in isolation. The trial, characterised as an individually randomised superiority assessment, targets women with postnatal depression in Beirut, Lebanon, and Nairobi, Kenya. It aims to determine if culturally tailored g-IPT, administered within community settings in both countries, outperforms HQ-SC in influencing child developmental outcomes, maternal depression, and the quality of the mother-child bond. DISCUSSION: The SUMMIT trial, designed with pragmatism, possesses the magnitude to evaluate g-IPT within two LMIC frameworks. It seeks to enlighten policymakers, service commissioners, professionals, and users about g-IPT's potential to alleviate maternal PND and bolster child developmental outcomes in LMICs. Additionally, the trial will generate valuable data on the clinical and economic merits of high-quality standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN15154316. Registered on 27 September 2023, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN15154316.

Antisocial cognition as a mediator of the peer influence effect and peer selection effect in antisocial adolescents.

The peer influence and peer selection effects are two widely replicated findings in the criminological literature that refer to the predictive relationship between antisocial behaviour and delinquent peer association as well as between delinquent peer association and antisocial behaviour, respectively. Research suggests that antisocial cognition might constitute a causal mechanism underlying part of these effects. This study investigated the extent that the peer influence and peer selection effects are mediated by one key aspect of antisocial cognition-beliefs and attitudes supporting peer conflict. This study examined whether beliefs and attitudes supporting peer conflict mediated the relationship between delinquent peer association and volume of self-reported antisocial behaviour and vice-versa, across a 1-year follow-up period, in 683 (433 male, 250 female) British adolescents (mean age: 13.8 years) with a history of serious antisocial behaviour. Participants completed measures at baseline and 6, 12 and 18 months thereafter. Findings indicated that beliefs and attitudes supporting peer conflict partially mediated the peer influence and peer selection effects, explaining a substantial proportion of the total effect in the peer influence (i.e., 26%) and peer selection (i.e., 17%) models. These results suggest that beliefs and attitudes supporting peer conflict could explain part of the mechanism underlying the peer influence and peer selection effects in adolescents with a history of serious antisocial behaviour.

Mentalization for Offending Adult Males (MOAM): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate mentalization-based treatment for antisocial personality disorder in male offenders on community probation.

BACKGROUND: Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), although associated with very significant health and social burden, is an under-researched mental disorder for which clinically effective and cost-effective treatment methods are urgently needed. No intervention has been established for prevention or as the treatment of choice for this disorder. Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) is a psychotherapeutic treatment that has shown some promising preliminary results for reducing personality disorder symptomatology by specifically targeting the ability to recognize and understand the mental states of oneself and others, an ability that is compromised in people with ASPD. This paper describes the protocol of a multi-site RCT designed to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MBT for reducing aggression and alleviating the wider symptoms of ASPD in male offenders subject to probation supervision who fulfil diagnostic criteria for ASPD. METHODS: Three hundred and two participants recruited from a pool of offenders subject to statutory supervision by the National Probation Service at 13 sites across the UK will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to 12 months of probation plus MBT or standard probation as usual, with follow-up to 24 months post-randomization. The primary outcome is frequency of aggressive antisocial behaviour as assessed by the Overt Aggression Scale - Modified. Secondary outcomes include violence, offending rates, alcohol use, drug use, mental health status, quality of life, and total service use costs. Data will be gathered from police and criminal justice databases, NHS record linkage, and interviews and self-report measures administered to participants. Primary analysis will be on an intent-to-treat basis; per-protocol analysis will be undertaken as secondary analysis. The primary outcome will be analysed using hierarchical mixed-effects linear regression. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using mixed-effects linear regression, mixed-effects logistic regression, and mixed-effects Poisson models for secondary outcomes depending on whether the outcome is continuous, binary, or count data. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be undertaken. DISCUSSION: This definitive, national, multi-site trial is of sufficient size to evaluate MBT to inform policymakers, service commissioners, clinicians, and service users about its potential to treat offenders with ASPD and the likely impact on the population at risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 32309003 . Registered on 8 April 2016.

Multisystemic therapy versus management as usual in the treatment of adolescent antisocial behaviour (START): 5-year follow-up of a pragmatic, randomised, controlled, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Multisystemic therapy is a manualised treatment programme for young people aged 11-17 years who exhibit antisocial behaviour. To our knowledge, the Systemic Therapy for At Risk Teens (START) trial is the first large-scale randomised controlled trial of multisystemic therapy in the UK. Previous findings reported to 18 months after baseline (START-I study) did not indicate superiority of multisystemic therapy compared with management as usual. Here, we report outcomes of the trial to 60 months (START-II study). METHODS: In this pragmatic, randomised, controlled, superiority trial, young people (aged 11-17 years) with moderate-to-severe antisocial behaviour were recruited from social services, youth offending teams, schools, child and adolescent mental health services, and voluntary services across England, UK. Participants were eligible if they had at least three severity criteria indicating past difficulties across several settings and one of five general inclusion criteria for antisocial behaviour. Eligible families were randomly assigned (1:1), using stochastic minimisation and stratifying for treatment centre, sex, age at enrolment, and age at onset of antisocial behaviour, to management as usual or 3-5 months of multisystemic therapy followed by management as usual. Research assistants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation; the participants could not be masked. For this extension study, the primary outcome was the proportion of participants with offences with convictions in each group at 60 months after randomisation. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN77132214, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2010, and Sept 1, 2012, 1076 young people and families were assessed for eligibility and 684 were randomly assigned to management as usual (n=342) or multisystemic therapy (n=342). By 60 months' of follow-up, 188 (55%) of 342 people in the multisystemic therapy group had at least one offence with a criminal conviction, compared with 180 (53%) of 341 in the management-as-usual group (odds ratio 1·13, 95% CI 0·82-1·56; p=0·44). INTERPRETATION: The results of the 5-year follow-up show no evidence of longer-term superiority for multisystemic therapy compared with management as usual. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Changes in General and Specific Psychopathology Factors Over a Psychosocial Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Recent research suggests that comorbidity in child and adolescent psychiatric symptoms can be summarized by a single latent dimension known as the p factor and more specific factors summarizing clusters of symptoms. This study investigated within- and between-person changes in general and specific psychopathology factors over a psychosocial intervention. METHOD: A secondary analysis was conducted of the Systemic Therapy for At-Risk Teens study, a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that compared the effects of multisystemic therapy with those of management as usual for decreasing antisocial behavior in 684 adolescents (82% boys; 11-18 years old at baseline) over an 18-month period. The general p factor and specific antisocial, attention, anxiety, and mood factors were estimated from a symptom-level analysis of a set of narrowband symptom scales measured repeatedly during the study. General and specific psychopathology factors were assessed for reliability, validity, and within- and between-person change using a parallel process multilevel growth model. RESULTS: A revised bi-factor model that included a general p factor and specific anxiety, mood, antisocial, and attention factors with cross-loadings fit the data best. Although the factor structure was multidimensional, the p factor accounted for most of the variance in total scores. The p factor, anxiety, and antisocial factors predicted within-person variation in external outcomes. Furthermore, the p factor and antisocial factors showed within-person declines, whereas anxiety showed within-person increases, over time. Despite individual variation in baseline factor scores, adolescents showed similar rates of change. CONCLUSION: The bi-factor model is useful for teasing apart general and specific therapeutic changes that are conflated in standard analyses of symptom scores. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: START (Systemic Therapy for At Risk Teens): A National Randomised Controlled Trial to Evaluate Multisystemic Therapy in the UK Context; http://www.isrctn.com; ISRCTN77132214.

Multisystemic therapy versus management as usual in the treatment of adolescent antisocial behaviour (START): a pragmatic, randomised controlled, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Adolescent antisocial behaviour is a major health and social problem. Studies in the USA have shown that multisystemic therapy reduces such behaviour and the number of criminal offences committed by this group. However, findings outside the USA are equivocal. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multisystemic therapy versus management as usual in the treatment of adolescent antisocial behaviour. METHODS: We did an 18 month, multisite, pragmatic, randomised controlled, superiority trial in England. Eligible participants aged 11-17 years with moderate-to-severe antisocial behaviour had at least three severity criteria indicating past difficulties across several settings and one of five general inclusion criteria for antisocial behaviour. We randomly assigned families (1:1) using stochastic minimisation, stratifying for treatment centre, sex, age at enrolment to study, and age at onset of antisocial behaviour, to receive either management as usual or 3-5 months of multisystemic therapy followed by management as usual. Research assistants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation; the participants could not be masked. The primary outcome was out-of-home placement at 18 months. The primary analysis included all randomised participants for whom data were available. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN77132214. Follow-up of the trial is still ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2010, and Sept 1, 2012, 1076 families were referred to nine multi-agency panels, 684 of whom were assigned to management as usual (n=342) or multisystemic therapy followed by management as usual (n=342). At 18 months, the proportion of participants in out-of-home placement was not significantly different between the groups (13% [43/340] in the multisystemic therapy group vs 11% [36/335] in the management-as-usual group; odds ratio 1·25, 95% CI 0·77-2·05; p=0·37). INTERPRETATION: The findings do not support that multisystemic therapy should be used over management as usual as the intervention of choice for adolescents with moderate-to-severe antisocial behaviour. FUNDING: Department for Children, Schools and Families, Department of Health.

Evaluation of multisystemic therapy pilot services in Services for Teens Engaging in Problem Sexual Behaviour (STEPS-B): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinically effective and cost-effective methods for managing problematic sexual behaviour in adolescents are urgently needed. Adolescents who show problematic sexual behaviour have a range of negative psychosocial outcomes, and they and their parents can experience stigma, hostility and rejection from their community. Multisystemic therapy (MST) shows some evidence for helping to reduce adolescent sexual reoffending and is one of the few promising interventions available to young people who show problematic sexual behaviour. This paper describes the protocol for Services for Teens Engaging in Problem Sexual Behaviour (STEPS-B), a feasibility trial of MST for problem sexual behaviour (MST-PSB) in antisocial adolescents at high risk of out-of-home placement due to problematic sexual behaviour. METHODS/DESIGN: Eighty participants and their families recruited from five London boroughs will be randomized to MST-PSB or management as usual with follow-up to 20 months post-randomization. The primary outcome is out-of-home placement at 20 months. Secondary outcomes include sexual and non-sexual offending rates and antisocial behaviours, participant well-being, educational outcomes and total service and criminal justice sector costs. Feasibility outcomes include mapping the clinical service pathways needed to recruit adolescents displaying problematic sexual behaviour, acceptability of a randomized controlled trial to the key systems involved in managing these adolescents, and acceptability of the research protocol to young people and their families. Data will be gathered from police computer records, the National Pupil Database and interviews and self-report measures administered to adolescents and parents and will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. DISCUSSION: The STEPS-B feasibility trial aims to inform policymakers, commissioners of services and professionals about the potential for implementing MST-PSB as an intervention for adolescents showing problem sexual behaviour. Should MST-PSB show potential, STEPS-B will determine what would be necessary to implement the programme more fully and at a scale that would warrant a full trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN28441235 (registered 25 January 2012).